America’s Supreme Court was right to expand presidential power

The Economist, The Economist
5 min read30 Jun 2026, 11:52 AM IST
logo
US President Donald Trump during a Presidential memorandum signing in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, (Bloomberg)
Summary
As undesirable as an imperial executive is, the court read the constitution correctly, argues Sai Prakash

THE DECISION was as unforeseen as a hot and humid Washington summer. On June 29th the Supreme Court, in Trump v Slaughter, struck down the congressionally imposed for-cause removal protections for commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Last September, the court had foreshadowed this when it granted the Trump administration’s request for an emergency motion to bar an ousted commissioner from resuming her duties.

Many commentators lament the humbling of the FTC and the other so-called independent agencies. They misread the constitution and the decision’s real-world effects. The court was belatedly correcting its own error, and the independence of these agencies was more imagined than real. Congress lacks constitutional power to restrict the president’s removal of officers enforcing the law, and the “independent agencies” have not been meaningfully independent for decades.

Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.

More